Olympics: London bid undermined from within

By David Welch

12:01AM BST 11 Jun 2003

Sadly, critics continue to challenge the virtues of a London 2012 Olympic bid . . . even though it provides a wonderful opportunity to enhance the image of sport enormously. But they are right about one thing. There is a huge question mark over many of those responsible for getting the bid off the ground.

Richard Caborn, the sports minister, is now known to have shocked onlookers by expressing personal reservations about a London bid during a visit to Athens just a few months ago; those who should have been responsible for conveying the importance of Government backing for the bid in May failed completely to match the glitz of the Paris announcement; the British Olympic Association (despite being part of the interviewing panel) inexcusably went public when undermining the suggestion that Cherie Blair should be considered as a bid leader; and all manner of evasive excuses have been heard since as to why Mrs Blair is not on the list of candidates to be interviewed for the position this week.

"It's a closed list," say some (close to the operation). Ignoring the fact that no sensible list should ever be "closed" and that new names are now being sought because only three non-English contenders remain.

Related Articles

Ignoring the fact that any approaches which have been made have not been followed through.

The truth, more likely, is that there are those close to the centre of this operation who fear for their own levels of influence if someone of Mrs Blair's stature takes control.

And then, of course, there are the head-hunters (who put together the original short-list). Would they be happy if the eventual choice was not submitted by them?

In short, there are some involved whose motives would appear to be questionable. And no Olympic bid is going to stand a chance if that continues.

Contrast this to Athens. When lawyer-politician Gianna Angelopoulos-Daskalaki was proposed as their bid leader, politicians and fellow bid executives put aside their own personal and political aspirations and endorsed her nomination to a man.

"Despite some initial reservations and political differences," says the Greek minister for sport, George Lianis, "we very quickly saw that Gianna was the right person for the job, and she received unanimous backing. Without her we would not have won the Games.

"I agree that Cherie Blair could do the same for your country. She would open doors internationally and, in many ways, would be similar to Gianna. It is crucial you find the right person to lead the bid. Mrs Blair would be a good choice."

That choice, of course, rests in the hands of the interviewing panel. But that should remain the case only if they can be trusted to be open-minded, and are protected from pressure and prejudice.

They must then come up with a bid leader who has charisma and an absolute belief in the case for London winning the vote in 2005.

Cherie Blair is an accomplished professional in her own right. She mixes easily in any company and would gain ready access to decision-makers across the world. She is well versed in the world of politics without being a politician, and understands the world of celebrity without being burdened with that label herself.

She would bring intellect and persuasion to the table in the manner of her Greek counterpart, and yet could show compassion and understanding gained through her years as a working mother and tireless charity worker.

Not least, her occasional brushes with controversy have provided her with the resolve to face criticism where she finds it, and to handle difficult situations . . . many of which are sure to arise during London's two years of bidding.

Mrs Blair remains this column's nomination to lift a London bid beyond the ordinary. She is British.

She is interested and she deserves an interview. And London deserves to be represented by the best available candidate.